sales business developmentapollo iocold emailcrm hygieneprospecting
Complete evaluation framework
What to assess and how to score it
Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.
01
Evaluation factor
Track record
35% weight
Check volume and quality numbers they personally owned: verified contacts built per week, list bounce rate under 3 percent, reply rates on sequences, meetings booked for their account executives.
Explains the market and buyer they sold to, not just the product
Distinguishes what they closed from what the team closed
Can describe a deal they lost and why
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No numbers; cannot describe what they actually sold or to whom.
2
Needs Improvement
Vague attainment; credit for team results is unclear.
3
Satisfactory
Real record with some numbers; attribution occasionally fuzzy.
4
Very Good
Clear numbers and ownership, including honest losses.
5
Excellent
Quotes concrete figures such as 400 verified leads weekly at 1.5 percent bounce, and names the clients or campaigns behind them.
02
Evaluation factor
Method and qualification
25% weight
Probe how they define an ICP and build a list: LinkedIn Sales Navigator filters, Apollo or ZoomInfo exports, Clay enrichment, NeverBounce or Hunter verification, dedupe rules before CRM upload.
Evidence to listen for
Has a repeatable approach to qualifying and progressing deals
Can walk a real deal from first contact to close
Handles objections with questions rather than scripts
Knows when to disqualify
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No method; pitches at everyone and hopes.
2
Needs Improvement
Weak qualification; deals stall with no diagnosis.
3
Satisfactory
Workable method; inconsistent on complex or long cycles.
4
Very Good
Clear repeatable method; disqualifies early and deliberately.
5
Excellent
Describes a repeatable sourcing and verification workflow with named tools, and explains which titles or firmographic signals they exclude and why.
03
Evaluation factor
Relationships and trust
25% weight
Assess how they work with the sales team and handle client data: handover notes, HubSpot or Pipedrive field hygiene, GDPR or CAN-SPAM limits, response to bad-lead complaints.
Evidence to listen for
Has clients or talent who came back or referred them
Manages a difficult conversation without damaging the relationship
Represents the client's interest, not only the commission
Builds rapport across seniority levels
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Transactional; burns relationships for a close.
2
Needs Improvement
Builds rapport but does not sustain relationships.
3
Satisfactory
Solid relationships; less tested in conflict.
4
Very Good
Repeat business and referrals; handles conflict without damage.
5
Excellent
Shows evidence of long client retainers, clean CRM handovers, and taking correction on lead quality without dropping output.
04
Evaluation factor
Drive and resilience
15% weight
Look for stamina on repetitive research shifts across time zones: daily quota tracking, what they did when a data source or email domain got blocked or reputation dropped.
Evidence to listen for
Handles rejection and a bad quarter without unravelling
Self-directed on pipeline rather than waiting for leads
Coachable on feedback
Honest in how they represent the product and themselves
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Gives up easily; blames leads, product, or market.
2
Needs Improvement
Motivation depends on momentum; resistant to coaching.
3
Satisfactory
Steady; recovers from setbacks with support.
4
Very Good
Self-motivated, coachable, and steady through bad stretches.
5
Excellent
Cites specific recovery moves (domain warmup, switching data providers, rewriting subject lines) and consistent daily output over many months.
Put this rubric to work
Score every candidate against the same standard
Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.
